Daniel N. Gordon, PC v. Rosenblum
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBalmer, C. J.
In this declaratory judgment action, we consider whether provisions of Oregon’s Unlawful Trade Practices Act (UTPA) that prohibit using “unconscionable tactic [s]” to collect certain debts, ORS 646.607(1), and causing likely “confusion” or “misunderstanding” regarding loans and credit, ORS 646.608(l)(b), apply to the debt collection activities of plaintiffs, a lawyer and his law firm. The trial. court held that those provisions apply only to certain consumer relationships and that plaintiffs’ roles as a lawyer and law firm engaged in debt collection activities, and not as a lender or debt…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
- Comcast Corp. v. Department of RevenueOregon Supreme Court · 2014
- Vannatta v. KeislingOregon Supreme Court · 1997
- Holcomb v. SunderlandOregon Supreme Court · 1995
- Halperin v. PittsOregon Supreme Court · 2012
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State ex rel Rosenblum v. Living Essentials, LLCOregon Supreme Court · 2023
- Coelsch v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
- Mason v. BCK Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
- Price v. LotlikarCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
- State ex rel Rosenblum v. Living Essentials, LLCCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.